成功实现P4P计划的挑战。

Emily Blecker
{"title":"成功实现P4P计划的挑战。","authors":"Emily Blecker","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>(1) Study results indicate that neither the quality scorecard nor the quality incentive payment program had a significant positive effect on general clinical quality. (2) Three main factors likely combined to weaken program effects: (1) modest size of the incentive; (2) use of rewards only; (3) targeting incentive payments to the group rather than to individuals. (3) The researchers found that, relative to the scorecard and reporting alone, the addition of the Quality Incentive Payment Structure (QIP) was associated with a reduction in quality, a result contrary to the intent of the payment incentive program.</p>","PeriodicalId":83710,"journal":{"name":"Findings brief : health care financing & organization","volume":"42 2","pages":"1-3"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The challenges in achieving successful P4P programs.\",\"authors\":\"Emily Blecker\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>(1) Study results indicate that neither the quality scorecard nor the quality incentive payment program had a significant positive effect on general clinical quality. (2) Three main factors likely combined to weaken program effects: (1) modest size of the incentive; (2) use of rewards only; (3) targeting incentive payments to the group rather than to individuals. (3) The researchers found that, relative to the scorecard and reporting alone, the addition of the Quality Incentive Payment Structure (QIP) was associated with a reduction in quality, a result contrary to the intent of the payment incentive program.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":83710,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Findings brief : health care financing & organization\",\"volume\":\"42 2\",\"pages\":\"1-3\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2014-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Findings brief : health care financing & organization\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Findings brief : health care financing & organization","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

(1)研究结果表明,质量计分卡和质量激励支付方案对临床总体质量均没有显著的正向影响。(2)三个主要因素可能共同削弱项目效果:(1)激励规模不大;(2)只使用奖励;(3)激励支付的目标是群体而不是个人。(3)研究人员发现,相对于单独的计分卡和报告,质量激励支付结构(QIP)的增加与质量下降有关,这与支付激励计划的意图相反。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The challenges in achieving successful P4P programs.

(1) Study results indicate that neither the quality scorecard nor the quality incentive payment program had a significant positive effect on general clinical quality. (2) Three main factors likely combined to weaken program effects: (1) modest size of the incentive; (2) use of rewards only; (3) targeting incentive payments to the group rather than to individuals. (3) The researchers found that, relative to the scorecard and reporting alone, the addition of the Quality Incentive Payment Structure (QIP) was associated with a reduction in quality, a result contrary to the intent of the payment incentive program.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信